linux-kernel - Re: checkpatch: kill the bogus camelcase check

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130410151911.GG6857@pd.tnic>
Date:	Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:19:11 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: checkpatch: kill the bogus camelcase check

On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:07:41AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-04-10 at 16:52 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 07:35:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > or maybe exclude drivers/scsi and include/scsi/
> > 
> > and arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
> 
> Actually, we get this all over drivers.  Some of the problems are to do
> with the fact that the check is wrong, so it thinks things like this
> 
> drm_core_has_MTRR
> 
> are studly caps when they're not, but we have a lot of device
> programming manual driven studly caps in PCI, ata, ide etc ..
> 
> We also have sanctioned use in mm, things like:
> 
> SetPageReserved
> ClearPageReserved
> 
> But the point still stands.  When checkpatch warns about this, there's
> nothing that the person submitting the patch can do because the usage
> was already embedded into the file they're patching.

Ha, I hit the nail right on the head! :-) This is exactly the reaction I
was aiming at, with mentioning yet another file in the kernel where this
check fires.

Yes, excepting certain files is not a good idea.
Yes, the check needs to go away because it is plain wrong.

Even if its there, I keep ignoring it which makes checkpatch less useful
and trustworthy. So full ACK to the intent to either remove it or make
it a suggestion only.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/